The fundamental rights defended to the convention in the ECHR the obligation to neutrality and fundamental freedoms

This study examines the transposition and interrelation of fundamental rights, such as the right to freedom of expression with particular focus on their impact on the exercise of priestly functions. These rights, guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights are especially significant in cases where religious service is performed out of personal conviction rather than under an employment contract, as exemplified in the jurisprudence, including the case of Tothpal and Szabo. The origin of the case lies in two applications submitted under Article 34 of the Convention, highlighting violations of fundamental rights stemming not only from interpretative tensions in national legal systems but also from conflicts between constitutional principles and doctrinal coherence. The research aims to identify how the Convention defines and safeguards essential rights, including freedom of religion, freedom of expression, equality, and the right to dignity, and to explore the way in which the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) interprets these rights through its jurisprudence. By analysing key judgments such as Kokkinakis v. Greece, Sahin v. Turkey, Lautsi v. Italy and Eweida and Others v. the United Kingdom, the study highlights that neutrality is not a discretionary political choice but a binding international legal requirement designed to ensure equal treatment of all individuals irrespective of their beliefs or identities. The article concludes that the obligation of neutrality derives from the universal and nondiscriminatory nature of the rights enshrined in the Convention and is essential for the functioning of a pluralistic democratic society. Failure to observe neutrality leads to inequality, indirect coercion, and erosion of democratic pluralism, whereas respect for neutrality guarantees the effective protection of human dignity and fundamental freedoms.